Toronto Escorts

York police starts publicly naming people charged with impaired driving

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,094
2,592
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
After what was called “another disappointing weekend,” York Regional Police has announced it will now publicly name those charged with criminal driving offenses related to impairment.

Police issued a news release on Monday, noting “16 drivers were charged with 27 impaired-related criminal driving charges” over the weekend.

York Regional Police Chief Eric Jolliffe said the force’s decision to name the drivers charged is “the next step to try to curb this distressing trend.”

“It’s clear that something has to change,” Jolliffe said in the release. “Effective immediately, York Regional Police will name all of the drivers charged with impaired-related criminal driving offences, to further make impaired driving socially unacceptable and so that members of our community can assist with notifying police if these offenders choose to drive while under suspension.”

In mid-November, York Regional Police said it had arrested five drivers on a Thursday evening for impaired driving.

“Innocent lives are put at risk every day by this irresponsible and criminal behavior,” Jolliffe said. “We are not giving up.”

The names will be released every Monday on yrp.ca, police said.

The first suspect named under this new initiative is a 32-year-old man who was charged in connection with an incident that occurred at around 10 p.m. on Nov. 30.

Officers were called to the area of Joshua Court, near Clark Avenue, in Richmond Hill for a report of a suspicious vehicle that was parked for over an hour, blocking a resident’s driveway.

As officers approached the vehicle, it began to drive away.

Police said that when they stopped the vehicle, they spotted a half-full bottle of vodka in the centre console. The driver smelled of alcohol.

The suspect has been identified by York Regional Police as Toronto-resident Alexander Kostenberg. He has been charged with impaired driving and over 80.

The charges have not been proven in court.

York Regional Police said it has laid more than 1,400 charges for impaired-related driving offences in 2018. They also said that five people have lost their lives due to collisions where alcohol or drug impairment were factors.

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/york-pol...eople-charged-with-impaired-driving-1.4202827
 

The "Bone" Ranger

tits lover
Aug 5, 2006
4,229
29
48
Shaming might work, who knows?
If they are employed individuals they will be jeopardizing their employment as someone is bound to catch their name in the news.

From my (sober) observation many people have absolutely no quams about driving under the influence.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,515
1,131
113
I like the naming as long as its related to impaired driving and crimes that hurt other people and property. They start doing this to johns and we and they will have problems!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,401
113
I would prefer after conviction. I think charged is taking away the presumption of innocence at the core of a fair system.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
17,885
12,294
113
I would prefer after conviction. I think charged is taking away the presumption of innocence at the core of a fair system.
I concur and I'll be surprised if it's not challenged on a constitutional basis. I don't drink alcohol but I've always thought it's unfair to name people only charged and yet not convicted with any offense.
 

Log-on

New member
Jun 30, 2018
26
0
0
Most criminal charges I would agree with the presumption of innocence, except for providable instances like driving under the influence.

It maybe my own personal naïvety, i just don’t understand why anyone would choose to operate any form of a a motorized vehicle, under the influence. Most people who are legal age to drive have been subjected to an array of don’t drink and drive campaigns in every form of media possible over the past 30 years almost.

You would think the message would sink in to the minds of the masses by now.







I would prefer after conviction. I think charged is taking away the presumption of innocence at the core of a fair system.
 

azeri99

Banned
Sep 19, 2018
949
1
0
Some people will stop at nothing, they hurt and screw up their own family, even shaming may not stop them.
True, if they are alcoholics shaming won't stop them, IMHO if you grt more than one DUI, your license should be taken away for life, once can be an accident where you drank a little too much but more than once you should know better after going through it the 1st time
 

Alyosha

Banned
Oct 23, 2016
163
2
0
If I have worked late and happen to have red eyes, some overzealous cop can charge me thinking I am high? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Just because I am charged? I have had cops give me tickets for laws that don't even exist. Thrown out in court, but still a pain. After conviction.....print all the names you want. But this is not supposed to be a communist country, despite our so called PM.
 

bazokajoe

Well-known member
Nov 6, 2010
9,247
7,190
113
They have been putting names on the Niagara Regional Police website for years.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
Totally against drinking and driving - but this is not the way to go about it. Being charged is not convicted. IF convicted - Make the penalties more severe. Move the BAC for criminality down from 0.08 to 0.07 Make the penalties for non-criminal impairment more severe even with a guilty plea. Eg: Longer license suspensions and higher fines.
 

Medman52

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2009
1,418
165
63
Once again, where will it stop? Impaired driving is hideous, everyone that has a driving licence knows it. But where does naming people that have been charged but not convicted stop?
Should everyone charged with a crime be publicly shamed before they’ve had their day in court?

I don’t have answers just questions, but my opinion is that it’s not right.
 

kugel2

Banned
Jan 13, 2017
310
0
0
I concur and I'll be surprised if it's not challenged on a constitutional basis. I don't drink alcohol but I've always thought it's unfair to name people only charged and yet not convicted with any offense.
The constitution is clear on this. Once someone is charged criminally, i.e. a criminal information is before the courts, it is public record and available for all to see. Only in certain cases will there be a publication ban of naming the accused, such as in the cases of familial child abuse, as it may tend to identify a young victim.

Case in point...we hear of Bruce McArthur's case quite frequently in the news, or the identity of those wanted for crimes and not even arrested yet. Should this stop too? None of these people have been convicted.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts